If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Re: Humans Lived with Dinosaurs + G E N E S I S Issues Part 2

Do read it if you get a chance. It's not particularly technical.

Anyway, the short summary is that the author looked at the creationist literature for examples where the creationist researchers clearly identified stratigraphy within the geological column that were laid down on dry land (as well as other things). Going through all of it, there is no part that can be uniformly correlated to the Flood sediments. And remember this is based on the Flood geologists own research and conclusions.

The author of the paper concludes with this:

The defeat of Flood Geology by its own hand is a great example of how the practice of sound geology leads to correct geological conclusions.

Have a great Thanksgiving!

It is only the cynic who claims “to speak the truth” at all times and in all places to all men in the same way, but who, in fact, displays nothing but a lifeless image of the truth… He dons the halo of the fanatical devotee of truth who can make no allowance for human weaknesses; but, in fact, he is destroying the living truth between men. He wounds shame, desecrates mystery, breaks confidence, betrays the community in which he lives, and laughs arrogantly at the devastation he has wrought and at the human weakness which “cannot bear the truth”. Dietrich Bonhoeffer, in Ethics.

Re: Humans Lived with Dinosaurs + G E N E S I S Issues Part 2

Originally Posted by undertheblood

It is my unqualified opinion that the Adamite race weren't contemporary with Dinosaurs. I believe in PreAdamite creations namely Neanderthal's, Piltdown Man, Lucy, cavemen. I know that I am on sifting sand, but that is what I believe.

Your opinion is noted now comes the scriptural account found in Genesis where it says the land dwelling creatures were created on the same day Adam was created.. Day six..

Genesis 1:24 And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after his kind: and it was so.

25 And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good.

26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.

27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.

28 And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.

29 And God said, Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in the which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed; to you it shall be for meat.

30 And to every beast of the earth, and to every fowl of the air, and to every thing that creepeth upon the earth, wherein there is life, I have given every green herb for meat: and it was so.

31 And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day.

Jude

“He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain that which he cannot lose.”

Re: Humans Lived with Dinosaurs + G E N E S I S Issues Part 2

Originally Posted by teddyv

Do read it if you get a chance. It's not particularly technical.

Will do brother!

Anyway, the short summary is that the author looked at the creationist literature for examples where the creationist researchers clearly identified stratigraphy within the geological column that were laid down on dry land (as well as other things). Going through all of it, there is no part that can be uniformly correlated to the Flood sediments. And remember this is based on the Flood geologists own research and conclusions.

Sounds intriguing.

Have a great Thanksgiving!

You to my friend, many blessings to you and your family

“Dispensationalism has thrown down the gauntlet: and it is high time that Covenant theologians take up the challenge and respond Biblically.” – Dr. Robert L. Reymond, author, A New Systematic Theology of the Christian Faith

Re: Humans Lived with Dinosaurs + G E N E S I S Issues Part 2

Originally Posted by undertheblood

It is my unqualified opinion that the Adamite race weren't contemporary with Dinosaurs. I believe in PreAdamite creations namely Neanderthal's, Piltdown Man, Lucy, cavemen. I know that I am on sifting sand, but that is what I believe.

>>>Neanderthal ancestors dispersed from Babel (Genesis 11) along with other humans. Division of the population and environmental challenges later produced people groups with distinctive physical characteristics, including Neanderthals and modern humans. But there is no biblical—or archaeological—reason to presume Neanderthals were intellectually inferior to other humans.<<<

"Lucy", is merely an ape. >>>a partial Australopithecus afarensis fossil discovered in 1974 in Ethiopia, is a supposed human ancestor. Evolutionists claim Lucy was bipedal due to human-like fossil footprints discovered 1000 miles away that are considered too early to be human. Yet the anatomical evidence is consistent with a fully ape classification for Lucy.

Good read on LUCY.

https://answersingenesis.org/human-e...-lucys-legacy/
I am quite sure many people post Adam and post Flood lived in caves, so, insofar as for the existence of "cavemen" they did exist, but ultamitly, they were just the defendants of Adam, fully human and built with the same stuff as you and me.

Its all in how you interpret the data, undertheblood, if you use a evolutionary mindset [ foundation ] to interpreted common evidence you will come to one conclusion.

If you use the Word of GOD, you will come to a completely different perspective. The two overlap in places ( which would be expected ) but they are very different paradigms.

As Jude point out, man and beast were made on the same day, so a "evolutionary type man" is in direct conflict with the Word of God in my humble opinion.

Food for thought anyways!

Peace bro!

“Dispensationalism has thrown down the gauntlet: and it is high time that Covenant theologians take up the challenge and respond Biblically.” – Dr. Robert L. Reymond, author, A New Systematic Theology of the Christian Faith

Re: Humans Lived with Dinosaurs + G E N E S I S Issues Part 2

Originally Posted by Jude

I've always wondered what the difference was between a mammoth and an elephant.. As i understand it when the world talks dinosaurs they're talking about millions of years.. cavemen and such.. a world in which Adam didn't exist..

Jude

It depends if the timeframes are wrong. I know the creationist websites have their own way of measuring time. I once did my own study on the rate of deposition and upliftment in the Mississipi Basin and calculated that the entire Triassic and Jurassic deposition if projected at current Mississipi deposition rates occurred over merely thousands of years.

The theory that the fossil deposition is millions of years old is based on the acceptance of the theory of evolution (requires time) and so is circular reasoning. The only scientific evidence is solely on slow current measured rates of decay from parent rock to daughter rock. However the original measurements are not easily available. And these measurements are not adjusted for strong magnetic fields and possibly higher atmospheric pressures a few thousand years ago because until recently it was not known that they can vary depending on solar penetration of the atmosphere and magnetic field.

In other words the age of the earth could be way out if one measures rates of decay and adjusts them for changes to atmospheric pressure and magnetic field intensity.

Re: Humans Lived with Dinosaurs + G E N E S I S Issues Part 2

The theory that the fossil deposition is millions of years old is based on the acceptance of the theory of evolution (requires time) and so is circular reasoning.

I'm hoping that was only clumsily worded. Fossilization processes have very little to do with the theory of evolution. Fossilization is preservation through mineral replacement and lithification.

The only scientific evidence is solely on slow current measured rates of decay from parent rock to daughter rock. However the original measurements are not easily available.

Relative age dating is within the realm of scientific evidence. It is based on observation and has been verified all over the earth.

And these measurements are not adjusted for strong magnetic fields and possibly higher atmospheric pressures a few thousand years ago because until recently it was not known that they can vary depending on solar penetration of the atmosphere and magnetic field.

In other words the age of the earth could be way out if one measures rates of decay and adjusts them for changes to atmospheric pressure and magnetic field intensity.

We looked at those magnetic variations and they simply do not give you what you want. And have you yet talked to a geochronologist about your decay rates yet?

It is only the cynic who claims “to speak the truth” at all times and in all places to all men in the same way, but who, in fact, displays nothing but a lifeless image of the truth… He dons the halo of the fanatical devotee of truth who can make no allowance for human weaknesses; but, in fact, he is destroying the living truth between men. He wounds shame, desecrates mystery, breaks confidence, betrays the community in which he lives, and laughs arrogantly at the devastation he has wrought and at the human weakness which “cannot bear the truth”. Dietrich Bonhoeffer, in Ethics.

Re: Humans Lived with Dinosaurs + G E N E S I S Issues Part 2

I'm hoping that was only clumsily worded. Fossilization processes have very little to do with the theory of evolution. Fossilization is preservation through mineral replacement and lithification.

Relative age dating is within the realm of scientific evidence. It is based on observation and has been verified all over the earth.

We looked at those magnetic variations and they simply do not give you what you want. And have you yet talked to a geochronologist about your decay rates yet?

Please give me more details regarding "relative age dating". On the surface this seems like something I agree with, that the geologic column is an accurate reflection of cataclysmic changes to earth conditions resulting in definite changes to the dominant flora/fauna over time. Certain species reduce in numbers, others appear from hidden niche environments to dominate earth. I have no problem with radiometric dating as a reflection in relative timescales, however the only aspect of that which could be incorrect is the relative dates need to be adjusted for surface exposure and latitude. But at any one location, yes radiometric dating is a decent reflection of relative age.

Regarding a geochronologist, I haven't specifically found one, but I have messaged others in the scientific field and have never received a decent response or assistance. It would take time and extensive communication for them to understand and apply my thought processes and I do not expect ever to come across such assistance from any scientist willing to rethink their whole career.

The concept revolves around the relative equilibrium in energy loss to energy gain in long term radioactive isotopes and so small adjustments to background radiation have insignificant effect on short term radioactive isotopes (eg iron), but there is potential for huge changes to long term isotopes due to a change to their near-equilibrium. Its hard to explain. The Purdue studies reveal a variety of cause-effect to radiometric decay rates, being time of day, seasons, solar flares. However the studies focus on the negligible changes to short term isotopes, no-one is looking at long term radioactive isotopes. For example they used silicon-32 and chlorine-36, how about studying the effects on potassium or argon? http://www.purdue.edu/newsroom/resea...enkinsDec.html

In addition their observations have an amusing focus on earth-sun distance. When one looks at seasonal changes to anything is it normal to focus on earth-sun distance ....hahahaha Why is it hotter in summer? Earth-sun distance ......hahahahaha
How about air pressure which also change with seasons? Air pressure actually directly effects background radiation hitting earth because muons are susceptible to air pressure and are the main cause of background radiation. And air pressure is lower in the heat of summer allowing for more muons on earth's surface. So seasonal average air pressures would have a direct effect on solar radiation on the earth's surface. And of course solar flares increase the size of the solar wind and so would also increase the number of muons and therefore surface radiation. Scientists have eliminated earth-sun distance as a factor now, but they are left confused as to what causes these seasonal fluctuations in decay, when the obvious is staring in their faces, air pressure and muons affecting background radiation. So too does solar radiation fluctuate daily, because average air pressures drops just after midday and the penetration of the solar wind through the magnetic field increases at midday due to less deflection by the field, and therefore there would naturally be a daily increase in muon penetration at midday or just after midday. This increased muon penetration and increased radiation would explain the drop in decay rates every day around midday. The scientific world isn't even close to picking up this obvious cause-effect between increased background radiation and decreased decay rates.

Of course and rightly so, no-one will put me in charge of these studies, or finance me to do these studies, but do not assume that I am therefore wrong about the potential exponential effect of fluctuations in solar wind penetration on long term radioactive isotope decay rates. Especially with a total blockout of muon penetration possible in ancient conditions of high air pressures and high magnetic fields.

Re: Humans Lived with Dinosaurs + G E N E S I S Issues Part 2

That post was very scientific, because teddyv is a geologist.

To the rest of you, I am saying that there is a lot of background radiation at the moment mainly caused by muons. This radiation seems to be slowing down the decay rates of rock and so giving the impression of ancient ages of fossils.

In the past there were higher air pressures and higher magnetic fields which would have blocked out muons nearly completely, blocking out most background radiation. Without this background radiation slowing down the decay, rocks containing fossils decayed a lot faster in the past. And so fossils are not as old as they seem.

Re: Humans Lived with Dinosaurs + G E N E S I S Issues Part 2

Originally Posted by DurbanDude

That post was very scientific, because teddyv is a geologist.

And I'm not a physicist, so I'm not up to snuff on muons et al.

To the rest of you, I am saying that there is a lot of background radiation at the moment mainly caused by muons. This radiation seems to be slowing down the decay rates of rock and so giving the impression of ancient ages of fossils.

I'm sure you made his argument in the past and I recall plenty of objections (not specifically by me, other than the paper you cited simply did not give the necessary variation to support revising dates from milions of years to thousands of years). Do you have a clear link of muons and background radiation? What do you mean by background radiation anyway? Incident radiation from the sun? Natural radioactive decay from granites and other intrusives? Cosmic background radiation?

In the past there were higher air pressures and higher magnetic fields which would have blocked out muons nearly completely, blocking out most background radiation. Without this background radiation slowing down the decay, rocks containing fossils decayed a lot faster in the past. And so fossils are not as old as they seem.

I know you've been harping on high pressures in the past. What was the evidence for that? Atmospheric oxygen concentrations have certainly varied in the past hence larger insect species other larger land animals. But that is not related to air pressure.

I looked up something about muons and magnetic fields. According to wiki the earths magnetic field intensity is in the range of 25000 to 65000 nT. A fridge magnet is about 10,000,000nT. What looks like a high-school science project found no significant deflection of muons using a 1.2T magnet. I found this as well, more recent, but I don't think it is particularly speaking to what you are saying, though I have not read it very deeply yet.

Rocks containing fossils are almost always sedimentary rocks, or lower grade metamorphic rocks. These rocks are rarely dated by radiometric means. Radiometrics are generally used on relatively unaltered intrusives (certain methodologies can use elements found as sulphide mineralization).

It is only the cynic who claims “to speak the truth” at all times and in all places to all men in the same way, but who, in fact, displays nothing but a lifeless image of the truth… He dons the halo of the fanatical devotee of truth who can make no allowance for human weaknesses; but, in fact, he is destroying the living truth between men. He wounds shame, desecrates mystery, breaks confidence, betrays the community in which he lives, and laughs arrogantly at the devastation he has wrought and at the human weakness which “cannot bear the truth”. Dietrich Bonhoeffer, in Ethics.

Re: Humans Lived with Dinosaurs + G E N E S I S Issues Part 2

Originally Posted by teddyv

And I'm not a physicist, so I'm not up to snuff on muons et al.

I'm sure you made his argument in the past and I recall plenty of objections (not specifically by me, other than the paper you cited simply did not give the necessary variation to support revising dates from milions of years to thousands of years). Do you have a clear link of muons and background radiation? What do you mean by background radiation anyway? Incident radiation from the sun? Natural radioactive decay from granites and other intrusives? Cosmic background radiation?

I know you've been harping on high pressures in the past. What was the evidence for that? Atmospheric oxygen concentrations have certainly varied in the past hence larger insect species other larger land animals. But that is not related to air pressure.

I looked up something about muons and magnetic fields. According to wiki the earths magnetic field intensity is in the range of 25000 to 65000 nT. A fridge magnet is about 10,000,000nT. What looks like a high-school science project found no significant deflection of muons using a 1.2T magnet. I found this as well, more recent, but I don't think it is particularly speaking to what you are saying, though I have not read it very deeply yet.

Rocks containing fossils are almost always sedimentary rocks, or lower grade metamorphic rocks. These rocks are rarely dated by radiometric means. Radiometrics are generally used on relatively unaltered intrusives (certain methodologies can use elements found as sulphide mineralization).

Yes I have discussed this subject in the past, but your point that you seem to remember that my points weren't great back then isn't a good point. Muons are formed from high speed protons that are susceptible to earth's atmosphere. which was stronger in the past. They are already mainly deflected, a stronger magnetic field would deflect them even more.

They are the major source of background radiation."Muons arrive at sea level with an average flux of about 1 muon per square centimeter per minute. This is about half of the typical total natural radiation background."http://cosmic.lbl.gov/SKliewer/Cosmic_Rays/Muons.htm

Protons are charged particles and are therefore influenced by magnetic fields. When the energetic protons leave the Sun, they preferentially follow (or are guided by) the Sun's powerful magnetic field. When solar protons enter the Earth's magnetosphere where the magnetic fields are stronger than solar magnetic fields, they are guided by the Earth's magnetic field into the polar regions where the majority of the Earth's magnetic field lines enter and exit.

Energetic protons that are guided into the polar regions collide with atmospheric constituents and release their energy through the process of ionization. The majority of the energy is extinguished in the extreme lower region of the ionosphere (around 50–80 km in altitude).https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muon

With higher past air pressure and a stronger magnetic field there would be less radiation around. And whenever conditions favor less radiation, the same conditions favor faster decay. This has been measured on fast decaying isotopes , its possible the effect is even stronger on the slower decaying ones.

Re: Humans Lived with Dinosaurs + G E N E S I S Issues Part 2

You may have to click on the "Download This PDF File" link near the bottom of the page.

I have not forgot about this Ted, just no time to give it time it deserves just now.

Heading on to night shift soon, I will read it.

“Dispensationalism has thrown down the gauntlet: and it is high time that Covenant theologians take up the challenge and respond Biblically.” – Dr. Robert L. Reymond, author, A New Systematic Theology of the Christian Faith

very readable, and has evolution fairly well smoke out. i took a lot of biology in high school and college and basically they really can't defend their theories concerning the complexities of life...they really just don't know, and we do.

(3) There can be inaccurate lead ratio comparisons, due to different types of lead within the sample. Correlations of various kinds of lead (lead 206, 207, etc.) in the specimen is done to improve dating accuracy. But errors can and do occur here also.

Thus, we have here astounding evidence of the marvelous unreliability of radiodating techniques. Rock known to be less than 300 years old is variously dated between 50 million and 14.5 billion years of age! That is a 14-billion year error in dating! Yet such radiodating techniques continue to be used in order to prove long ages of earth’s existence. A chimpanzee typing numbers at random could do as well.

Re: Humans Lived with Dinosaurs + G E N E S I S Issues Part 2

In your link to that atrociously editied Evolution Facts handbook, I did not see a single citation after 1975. There is a quote by an H.C. Dudley that the author ascibes certain radioactivity research to him that he did not do - he was writing a letter to a journal and citing another's work. That's pretty sloppy.

It is only the cynic who claims “to speak the truth” at all times and in all places to all men in the same way, but who, in fact, displays nothing but a lifeless image of the truth… He dons the halo of the fanatical devotee of truth who can make no allowance for human weaknesses; but, in fact, he is destroying the living truth between men. He wounds shame, desecrates mystery, breaks confidence, betrays the community in which he lives, and laughs arrogantly at the devastation he has wrought and at the human weakness which “cannot bear the truth”. Dietrich Bonhoeffer, in Ethics.

Re: Humans Lived with Dinosaurs + G E N E S I S Issues Part 2

Yes I have discussed this subject in the past, but your point that you seem to remember that my points weren't great back then isn't a good point.

I realize that, but it does not seem that your arguments have changed much.

Muons are formed from high speed protons that are susceptible to earth's atmosphere. which was stronger in the past. They are already mainly deflected, a stronger magnetic field would deflect them even more.

They are the major source of background radiation."Muons arrive at sea level with an average flux of about 1 muon per square centimeter per minute. This is about half of the typical total natural radiation background."http://cosmic.lbl.gov/SKliewer/Cosmic_Rays/Muons.htm

Again, great. Except they make zero claim for anything close to a 6000 year old earth. I'm just not seeing how you can fit all this in within the time period you've got to work with (and forgive me that I've forgotten your timeline).

With higher past air pressure and a stronger magnetic field there would be less radiation around. And whenever conditions favor less radiation, the same conditions favor faster decay. This has been measured on fast decaying isotopes , its possible the effect is even stronger on the slower decaying ones.

How much faster? Why would it be stronger on slower decaying ones? Why do radiometric dating methods continue to give good information that can be correlated and interpreted consistently?

I've worked on a project that had upper bounds determined by K-Ar and U-Pb methods. We analyzed mineralization to get a sense of timing using Re-Os. The results were consistent with the other dates based on stratigraphic principles and the geological model of the area.

It is only the cynic who claims “to speak the truth” at all times and in all places to all men in the same way, but who, in fact, displays nothing but a lifeless image of the truth… He dons the halo of the fanatical devotee of truth who can make no allowance for human weaknesses; but, in fact, he is destroying the living truth between men. He wounds shame, desecrates mystery, breaks confidence, betrays the community in which he lives, and laughs arrogantly at the devastation he has wrought and at the human weakness which “cannot bear the truth”. Dietrich Bonhoeffer, in Ethics.

Re: Humans Lived with Dinosaurs + G E N E S I S Issues Part 2

I have a great discussion idea for this thread... I think... well maybe an offshoot Dinosaur question...

First, I know for a fact that what we now call "dinosaurs" were in fact called "dragons" only hundreds of years ago and before. Correct?

So then I would like your opinion on this theory, and would like to know if this has been proposed before?

Gen 3:Now the serpent was more subtil than any beast of the field which the Lord God had made. And he said unto the woman, Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden? 2 And the woman said unto the serpent, We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden:

Unlike some, I take the scriptures literally unless there is a reason to understand it as a story or parable. I see this as literal. So then, we can gather here that there was a reptilian type creature that through further reading we can glean has legs and can speak. We also see that Satan is either represented by, takes the form of, or possesses the body of this serpent. This is no clearer than in Revelation 12.

Revelation 12:9 And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world:

Is it possible that Satan in fact had been cursed into the form of a "reptilian dinosaur" way back in Genesis chapter 3? Let me present my case:

In Genesis 3, the Serpent deceives Eve, and Eve then shares the sin with Adam. When the Lord catches up with them, He pronounces curses on both humans, and the serpent. Lets assume that the Serpent was indeed either possessed by Satan, or that Satan took the form of that serpent. If Satan was in that form, when he was cursed, would he be stuck in the form of a dinosaur for all these many thousands of years? Lets look at the curse:

Gen 3:13 And the Lord God said unto the woman, What is this that thou hast done? And the woman said, The serpent beguiled me, and I did eat. 14 And the Lord God said unto the serpent, Because thou hast done this, thou art cursed above all cattle, and above every beast of the field; upon thy belly shalt thou go, and dust shalt thou eat all the days of thy life: 15 And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.

So a couple things to notice here:

1) God did not say, "Serpent, I curse you...", but rather the text says that HE SAID UNTO THE SERPENT "thus thus thus"... So then the Lord cursed the being in front of Him. And then what He said was very important...

2) The Lord told the reptile dinosaur "Because you have done this" (Because you have caused my creation to sin)... Do creatures today cause us to sin like that? NO!

3) the Lord cured the reptile Creature to go on its belly, eat dust... If this was the most beautiful Angel in the body of a dinosaur, essentially he was just trapped in this creature...

4) Verse 15 is very clear that the Serpent was Satan, as only Satan bruised the Heal of the seed of Israel by setting Israel against their Lamb. And Jesus bruised the Head of Satan through His resurrection.

So then this makes sense when you see this picture of Satan:

Ezekiel 28:12 Son of man, take up a lamentation upon the king of Tyrus, and say unto him, Thus saith the Lord God; Thou sealest up the sum, full of wisdom, and perfect in beauty. 13 Thou hast been in Eden the garden of God; every precious stone was thy covering, the sardius, topaz, and the diamond, the beryl, the onyx, and the jasper, the sapphire, the emerald, and the carbuncle, and gold: the workmanship of thy tabrets and of thy pipes was prepared in thee in the day that thou wast created.14 Thou art the anointed cherub that covereth; and I have set thee so: thou wast upon the holy mountain of God; thou hast walked up and down in the midst of the stones of fire.15 Thou wast perfect in thy ways from the day that thou wast created, till iniquity was found in thee.

This Angel was Subtle (wise), was in the garden of Eden with Eve, and was found to have iniquity... So then He was cursed... So then if Satan was cursed in the form of a dinosaur, would he not continue to grow of thousands of years, as He has eternal life? Here is what the Dragon looks like after thousands of years of growth:

Rev 12:3 And there appeared another wonder in heaven; and behold a great red dragon, having seven heads and ten horns, and seven crowns upon his heads. 4 And his tail drew the third part of the stars of heaven, and did cast them to the earth: